Bolded etc. for emphasis. There are two options. And only two options.
The argument of "but it's a waste of time to give guilty people due process" begs the question....it assumes that guilt (a term that can only be applied AFTER a procedure to determine same) applies.
Applying due process to people who 99% of us know will eventually be adjudicated guilty, not entitled to asylum, what have you, is what tells us that due process is available for THE REST OF US. If you say "well, but no due process for guilty people," and then allow an extra-judicial determination of guilt to make that dividing line....then you've just ended due process. For everyone.
Because I, local director of an ICE office, just decided that Chicken Sandwich is a member of Tren de Aragua, or he doesn't like jews, or he eats funny-sounding foreign foods, and therefore he has no legal status in the US. What's that, Chicken Sandwich says "wait! I'm a US citizen, let me prove it!"? Fuck that, that's just what the terrorist gang members want, to gum up our system with their bullshit defenses. Onto the plane you go, non-stop to El Salvador, terrorist!
Chicken Sandwich wants it skipped. Because when we "know" someone is guilty/not entitled to asylum, we can skip all that law and rights and shit.
Of course, I know that Chicken Sandwich is a secret member of Tren de Aragua. His name and ID? Those are all fake, a ruse to allow him to infiltrate our beloved country and commit his terrorist acts of depravity. I am protecting us all when I nab him, shove him in the back of a van, and have him on a flight to El Salvador to rot in prison that same day. Why should he get any chance to prove his claims of US citizenship? Why are you siding with a terrorist gang member?